The dilemma faced by Norman
It was probably last year’s election result that convinced Greens co- leader Russel Norman it was time to explore other career options.
For six years, Norman has been the de facto leader of the Opposition, after Labour lost the plot with a series of inept leaders and a chronic identity crisis about what, if anything, it stands for.
Yet in last September’s election, the Greens barely held their own, and failed to increase their vote.
Their future looks somewhat bleak.
At the very least, Norman was facing three further years in Opposition – and quite possibly six – in something of a codependent relationship with Labour.
If a Labour Party led by Andrew Little is to succeed, it will in all likelihood be partly at the expense of the Greens. That’s the dilemma the Greens face.
They can aspire to the heady heights of 15 per cent ( and beyond) of the vote only in a context where Labour fails, and the centre-left thereby remains in Opposition.
Conversely, if Labour is to flourish and win power, then about 12 per cent looks like the natural ceiling for the Greens.
That’s a daunting prospect for any Greens co-leader, well before you proceed to what life might be like as a junior partner in a government led by a Labour Party that has never been renowned for its tolerance of dissent, or for showing respect to its allies.
In brief, Norman was facing – after nine years in the job – a significant further period on the Opposition benches, while also knowing that his efforts could well culminate in something of a pyrrhic victory for the Greens.
For any parent with a young family – Norman and his partner Katya Paquin have three preschool children – you would have to wonder whether there weren’t more rewarding ways of spending your life.
His likely successor – Kevin Hague – will face many of the same problems after Norman steps down in May.
For now, Norman will continue to be the Greens’ finance spokesman.
When the party annual conference in May anoints the new leader, however, there is a compelling argument for Norman to relinquish that finance role as well, in favour of new MP James Shaw.
Not only would that help to ensure that Hague is not upstaged by his predecessor, but the finance role would provide a useful platform for Shaw to lift his national profile.
Hague brings his own skills to the job.
He is a solid performer and good off-the-cuff public speaker, with senior management experience in public health.
Still, the Green Party – and Parliament – will be the poorer for losing Norman’s incisive debating skills, and his ability to launch credible attacks on the Government’s economic and environmental settings.
That aside, Norman’s departure does seem like it is occurring at the right time, and for the right reasons.
In future, the interesting contrast – or lack of one – will be between Hague and Andrew Little.
After May, it seems that the leaders of the centre-left will be presenting almost identical political styles to the voting public.
They’re both uncharismatic, plain- talking and capable managerial types.
The ‘‘loony left’’ label will be hard to apply to Hague and Little. A ‘‘lacklustre left’’ label though, could become a problem.